Whats the real use case for a blockchain other than a cryptocurrency

Going down the rabbit hole of what use case a particular technology can solve is an effort that will yeild the wrong kind of problem to solve, most of the times. Steve Jobs very famously said ‘we are not going to use some cool new technology and find out a problem that can be solved from that tech. We always work backwards from the customer problem’.

In that vein, let me rephrase the above question as what are some of the key problems that can be potentially solved by a non-transactional blockchain ?

For now, it is proven that there is a use case for a crypto currency, even if that use case is just buy & #HODL. But what other problems can be solved.

What if we look at the use case selection problem from the lens of decentralization. What if we have to take all main stream applications away from centralization. What then.

Now pretty much every use case is a web 3.0 use case. What begs the question however - is decentralization so paramount to our future and is it even possible.

If we go back in history and visit the origins of internet, the origins are rooted in US military. The need for a network that could sustain any enemy attack. Hence the best defence against any attack is the absolute elimination of single point of failures. This ideology is what drove the invention of TCP/IP that forms the backbone of today’s internet.

However that decentralized backbone has enabled several centralized organizations to take control of application ownership. All these applications can now be thought of single point of failures. But are they ? Within each centralized governance unit, almost all applications are decentralized from a computation perspective. A better phrase to describe these applications is distributed.

So are the phrases ‘distributed’ and ‘decentralized’ really the same ? Not at all. Distributed simply means distributing the computation over multiple nodes so as to increase availability. Decentralization means absolutely no centralized control over any computation. So in a distributed system, all the nodes can still be controlled by one authority. Does not make it decentralized.

A truly decentralized network has the following characteristics:

• Any node or computer can potentially join the network without any centralized approval.
• Such a node can then participate in the collective computation of the network.
• Such a node can and will act maliciously.
• All malicious actions should be prevented.

So coming back to the question - is this decentralization required. Hard to answer. If we look at all the use cases today from a ‘one world’ perspective, then absolutely yes. Of course, the argument that some control will reside in a select group of nodes holds true. That still does not take away the decentralization aspect. Those nodes will not be able to hold control forever. It is also been proven that no organization or corporation has been able to weild control forever. The S&P500 of 1985 looks nothing like the S&P500 of today. So market forces do ensure that control isn’t permanent. But, what about governments. That’s where decentralization acts as a game changer. So any use case that has to do with government participation is potentially ripe for a decentralized disruption. Or may be not.